Editorial Policy: Facts, Independence, and the No-Medical-Advice Line
This site is pricing journalism about a medical category, which imposes two duties at once: the figures must be verifiable, and the writing must never drift into medical advice. Our editorial rules exist to keep both.
Facts over adjectives. Claims about programs are sourced to what the program itself publishes, capture-dated, and archived. Where we characterize a program ("stated-not-verified," "unrankable," a watch-out note), the characterization states its evidence in the same breath. We do not publish anonymous review-mill sentiment as fact.
No medical advice, ever. We report what medications cost and how programs are structured. Whether any GLP-1 — brand or compounded — is appropriate for a given person is a licensed clinician's call, and every page says so. We describe standard titration ladders and regulatory status as public facts; we do not recommend doses, formulations, or clinical strategies.
Independence is structural, not aspirational. Rankings are computed from the database by the published methodology; no commercial consideration can reorder them because no human orders them. Any material connection between this site and any covered company is disclosed at /ownership-disclosure/, and any page where such a connection is relevant links to it. Advertising, if any, is labeled and governed by the same page.
Errors are inventory. When we get a figure wrong, the correction is published at /corrections/ with the wrong number, the right number, and the dates — permanently. A comparison site's credibility is exactly the sum of the mistakes it admits to.